Consumers in New England got a shock in their utility bills this month. A 40% increase over the previous month.
National Grid, the largest utility in Massachusetts, decided that electricity prices for this winter would rise to 24¢/kWh, a record high.

But peak electricity prices could exceed 100¢/kWh like they did last year during the polar vortex (Forbes).

Not sure why New Englanders are so surprised. It was their choice to throw all-in for natural gas and renewables in a land of harsh winters. But they’ve refused to build new gas pipelines. And they’re shutting a nuclear plant that has 20 years of cheap reliable cold-resistant energy left on it.

New England already has the highest electricity prices in North America – about 18¢/kWh averaged over the whole year. The national average is 12¢/kWh. In my own state of Washington, it’s only 8¢/kWh thanks to hydro and nuclear, and a reasonable market structure (Forbes).

But last year during the polar vortex, New Englanders paid over 20¢/kWh.

There aren’t enough gas pipelines serving New England and much of New York, as seen from the lack of blue lines in this region of the map. Along with shutting Vermont’s only nuclear plant and various coal plants, this will continue to cause electricity shortages, and higher prices, during every winter for years to come. Source: US DOT Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA)

New England utility companies have been warning their customers since last summer to expect sharp increases in heating and electricity bills this winter. They blame the continuing shortage of natural gas pipeline capacity. Even as New Englanders embraced natural gas for both electricity and heating, they’ve refused to build the pipelines needed to support that choice (see figure).

It’s not that utility costs have actually increased. It’s just that the companies know they’re as poorly prepared for this winter as they were last year. At that time, a hiccup in the polar vortex allowed huge volumes of cold Arctic air to escape their usual confines and flow into New England and north-central America (Forbes).

ISO New England, which manages the region’s transmission grid and wholesale electricity market, had to bring up dirtier coal and oil plants to try to make up the difference. Nuclear energy, unaffected by cold, became the primary provider of electricity in New England, edging out gas 29% to 27% (Hartford Business). Oil generation made up 15% while coal accounted for 14%. Hydro, with a little renewable, provided the rest.

The utilities know they are in for another bad winter and have adjusted prices up knowing they’ll have to pay for these dirtier and more expensive stop-gaps when the same thing happens this winter.

But nuclear won’t be able to help as much this year. The political and warped market pressures have forced Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant to close at the end of this month (Forbes). Ironically, low gas prices were cited as a reason for this closure 20 years ahead of schedule. And some coal plants are closing as well, making sufficient capacity and reliability for the region dicey.

There’s been a lot of talk about energy reliability and how to price it. The rise electricity prices to 24¢/kWh this winter might be a good place to start.

New England has put too many of their energy eggs in the gas basket without thinking about what that means in terms of required pipelines and other infrastructure. Last year, ISO warned New England about becoming increasingly dependent on natural gas for both electricity and home heating, to the exclusion of all else.

ISO knows that low diversity in sources for electricity is dangerous, just like in nature. As demand for natural gas in home heating spikes in winter, there is much less fuel for power plants. Proposals for new gas pipelines have been stomped down.

Fierce opposition to pipelines from the shale gas-rich areas of New York and Pennsylvania comes from concerns over fracking technologies, pipeline leaks and climate change. Even new transmission lines to carry hydropower from Quebec can’t find support in the people of New England.

Some lawmakers are afraid cheaper energy would stifle wind and solar projects (NYTimes.com).

Huh? Then why complain about higher prices? If you want gas, wind and solar to power New England, you’d better be prepared for even higher prices than this.

But energy choices have ethical as well as environmental and economic effects.John Howat of the National Consumer Law Center, a Boston-based nonprofit advocacy group for low-income residents, points to the large number of lower-income households that don’t have sufficient income to pay these higher utility bills (Boston Globe).

Electricity costs are directly proportional to how well utilities can predict demand and use. Because it's costly to ramp fossil fuel power plants up and down, even ordinary weather changes cost a lot of money. Duke Power, for example, annually loses about $10 million from everyday weather prediction errors (Ron Keener).

The polar vortex drove the cost of wholesale power to $5 billion in New England for just the three months of December, January and February. And it could be worse this year without Vermont Yankee Nuclear to help. Even more expensive coal and oil generation with have to make up that loss.

In the end, a diverse energy mix is really, really important, and not just for New England. A third fossil, a third nuclear and a third renewable would make a diverse mix that is incredibly reliable, sustainable, and cost-effective. And which would cut emissions in half over the baseline mix we have now (New Mexico Journal of Science).

But you have to be smart. Gas needs pipelines. Reliability requires nuclear. You better get that infrastructure built. And it’s not too late to keep Vermont Yankee running.

At least through a few more winters.

Dr. James Conca is an expert on energy, nuclear and dirty bombs, a planetary geologist, and a professional speaker. Follow him on Twitter @jimconca and see his book at Amazon.com

I have been a scientist in the field of the earth and environmental sciences for 33 years, specializing in geologic disposal of nuclear waste, energy-related research, planetary surface processes, radiobiology and shielding for space colonies, subsurface transport and envir...